My Fuji SL/1 is great: comfortable and plenty stiff for my power. I know a guy who rode for the now-defunct Yahoo team who really liked his. Each of us ride small-medium frames, however. I'm not sure the Altamira was an improvement. Certainly look-wise I prefer the SL/1.

An elite team that sometimes races around here rolls on Fujis b/c of one of their rider's commitments to Fuji via his olympic track sponsorship. The team was on Parlees before and the one rider I talked to said that they all loved their bikes.

Another local team switched to Diamondback this year after being on Treks in the past. Same thing. So many people dismiss the brands sold at Performance or cheaper retailers as being crappy or something, but when you talk to dudes who actually race the things at a high level most of them find top end bikes to all be very good in one way or another and rarely do they have too many complaints.

I myself have an 08 SL-1 in the C-10 carbon. This model is no longer offered

Many members of our team has been on Fuji bikes for years and have been more then pleased. Some new members who have both the Altamira and the SST comment that the Altamira is the bike they want to be on for long road races or long training rides. The compact geometry and longer top tube then the SST makes handling confident. The bike climbs and descends great.

We have had 1 racer who after damaging his 2.0 Altamira in a race pileup upgraded to the 1.0 who commented that he preferred the compliance of the 2.0.

As long as your local shop has a good relationship with Fuji any warranty issues should be taken care of pretty fast. Our local guys have received crash replacements with in a week as long as Fuji had their sizes in stock. Early releases of the Altamira have had some rear dropout alignment issues but we have not seen any of those problems this year. Fuji is a very old company that backs their products well. I'm sure you will be happy with an Altamira. The decision on a 2 series or higher preference would depend if you cared about the weight or carried enough weight or power to want the higher version

The the all black Altamira listed for sale on that Colorado Cyclist link is the exact same model and year as the Altamira I had problems with. Again, the problems with that particular frame was 1. the rear end was really numb feeling, to the point where I always felt like I was riding on a flat tire and sliding out on the rear tire in turns. 2. Both the warranty replacement frame and the replacement for that replacement frame were out of alignment right out of the box. That's probably the "rear dropout alignment issue" UberBike mentioned in his comment.

That's interesting... I went to the link given above and under the description it says that the frame weight is 3.1 lbs (~1.4kg). I'm guessing this includes the fork right?

When I weighed the frame and fork separately, the frame (no bottle cage bolts, no seatpost collar, no headset, & no BB) was in the 840's & the fork was in the 340's (uncut). The frameset came with an FSA headset. My framesets were 47cm. If you add 840g & 340g. Plus, add another 150g for missing headset, collar, and bolts. And take into account extra weight for a bigger frame size and maybe the weight of the box it came in, 1.4kg sounds close.

I'm thinking of getting a '13 altamira frameset -- choices are the Altamira SL and the Altamira "special edition" gray-on-carbon... anyone know if there's a difference in the actual frameset or whether its just a cosmetic difference? The SL costs $100 more at cost (yay for LBS sponsorship) but I feel like that's not just an extra hundred for a fancy paintjob. And anyone got any stiffness numbers or anything? The only performance testing I can find on the altamira is in the TOUR magazine (link) but that's testing the altamira 1.0, not sure how that compares to the SL.

I've been on my "special edition" grey on black Altamira for a month now. It is phenomenal. A 47 cm like roadytracky's, weights were right on with what he posted... 840 and 340. At first I was surprised how much more road I felt both front and back compared to my Caad9. Then I put 25mm pro4s on it, and am convinced its the best race frame I've ever ridden. Geometry for my size is the perfect blend of stable and quick. I couldn't ask for better handling. Acceleration is more immediate than anything I've felt, and out of the saddle efforts are a blast! Seriously, I love it. Bang for buck, it is a super-bike at mid-tier prices. Can't wait to race it in 2013.

I believe the SL is a tweaked version from the special edition. It is not exactly the same... for example, there is more clearance around the BB to accommodate a few issues with older quarqs. (special edition has clearance problems with some 2012 SRAM red quarqs, 2013 is perfect) Other than that, I'm not sure of the changes.

Haha, you sound positively enamored with the bike According to geometry charts looks like I would need a size 44 so I'm probably looking at an even lighter bike... This is very tempting to jump on right away (I'm considering a supersix frameset as well). What's the difference between the SL/special-edition and the 1.0? They're not internal-cable-routing right? And also not ISP, correct?

I am enamored. I had a giant TCR SL from the Once carbon era, then went aluminum with a CAAD9 and a Focus AX. Back on carbon, and thrilled at how evolved the tech has become.

Regarding the 44cm. It is 1cm lower and 7mm shorter for stack and reach than the 47. Pretty close, and I would certainly suggest using stack and reach to determine your correct fit. I really feel the 72.5 headtube angle and 977 wheelbase are an awesome handling combo. If you can use a 1cm shorter stem with a -17 rise to go with the 47, I'd suggest it. Also, with the 47, it is impossible to get a big bottle in the seat tube bottle position, and very tight with a small bottle. It may be almost impossible to carry a second bottle on the 44. (And as a note, the frame comes with a 15mm headset cone spacer)

Cabling is blessedly external, although there are ports for internal Di2 routing. No ISP. I can't really help on differences between "special edition"/1.0 and SL. I'm pretty sure the competitive cyclist deals and the special edition framesets are equivalent to 2012 1.0 and LTD framesets, with the new SL being the tweaked 2013 top offering. 2013 uses c15 carbon blend, and 2012 used D6. No idea of the true difference between the carbon blends, so don't quote me here!

Hm thanks for the info, I'll take a look at the charts again. Any chance you could post a picture of your setup? I'm trying to get an idea of how the frame scales in the smaller sizes. Plus I like looking at pretty bikes

That frame is pretty... I just wish they didn't shorten the seat tube so much for the shorter sizes. Also wish bike shops had the smaller sizes in stock. I can't find anywhere with a 44/47 to try. Thanks for the infothough!

Just FYI for anyone that might come across this thread,I emailed AdvSports (the parent company of Fuji) about SL vs Special Edition and they said:

Hi,The geometry, ride quality, and look of the 2012 Special Edition Grey on Black Altamira and 2013 Altamira SL frame are exactly the same. The weight however is going to be different. The 2012 Altamira SE frame has a listed weight of: 1440 grams and the 2013 Altamira SL frame has a listed weight of: 1287 grams. The reason for the weight difference is because of the improved layup process during manufacturing (read: less resin needed between layers of carbon). I hope this helps.

Thanks for contacting us,Advanced Sports International

I guess this means that there is no 2013 special edition with the updated layup process...

Who is online

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum